Donald Trump stirred the pot when he announced that he's running for President of the United States. It's a strange phenomenon where we see all the media idiots pop-up from conservative Fox News Dana Perino attacking Trump today, while the liberal MSNBC host Ed Schultz defended Trump.

Is that strange, or what?

Trump simply stirred the pot, a pot that needed to be stirred once and for all.

Perino objected on Trump's wall with Mexico:

"Make Mexico pay for it?" asks Perino. According to Perino, Trump can't change tariff laws with Mexico in order to pay for a fence, while Mexico's raising tariffs on U.S. goods is an accepted modus operandi?

According to Perino, the greatest and mightiest nation on earth should fear Mexico because it can switch selling the oil to China. The U.S has Hydraulic fracturing, which has unleashed vast new quantities of crude oil and natural gas. The percentage of fuel flowing from shale-rock compared with traditional oil and gas fields has been steadily rising. According to Fox's Perino, instead of the United States leading, we should submit to China and Mexico instead. It gets to show the Stockholm Syndrome this crazy blond lives under. Yet, Shultz of MSNBC was positive about Trump:

"He has created more jobs than all the other candidates put together … so why don't they listen to him …" says Shultz. Can anyone deny that? No.

Regardless of Trump's accomplishments, the fact that he is running makes many who love politicians uncomfortable. "You're kidding?" asked another pot Trump must have stirred. Michael Medved asked AM 770 KTTH's David Boze, objecting moments after hearing the news Tuesday morning. "I think this gives a terrific opportunity to literally hundreds of millions of Americans to do something we've always wanted to do, which is to vote Donald Trump off the island."

Medved says the bottom line is, do you really want this guy's finger on the nuclear trigger?

Listening to Medved made me laugh when all the callers on his show, unlike Medved, 100% agreed on Trump's announcement to run for president.

Medved, whose show I have been on in the past to combat racism against Jews, should stop commenting on the political race and focus more on his understanding of race. What I mean by "race" is the other meaning for the word "race." Michael Medved's commentary on the supremacy of American DNA is one of the most offensive, racist remarks coming from a man who is fighting racism. In his mind, racial tension is the fault of slaves' undesirable DNA, which he claims is less given to positive traits like risk-taking. What makes us different is not our gene, but our belief. What makes us rise or fall in America is how we cling to our Judeo-Christian heritage.

This, while the majority of Jews in the U.S. voted for Obama. Medved and other Jewish media folk seem to have done a lousy job in educating their brethren. They have a fear to confront social agendas and are quick to pass judgment and even slander Trump instead, saying that, statistically, he has no chance of winning.

But statistics, many times, are the false prophecy that most follow. Looking back at 1976 and 1992, two candidates with lower name recognition wound up taking the nomination. Jimmy Carter was tied for 12th place in the early polling in 1975; Bill Clinton was in 13th place in the first half of 1991.

And in 2007, Hillary Clinton held a 15-point lead over Senator Barack Obama in what essentially became a two-candidate race after John Edwards faded away. Obama eventually took the nomination in an extremely close race.

So by what standard can someone say that Trump has no chance?

Already, so many slander and say all sorts of things on Trump. He is anti-Mexican, anti-Chinese, anti-Saudi … just because he brings out the bad about the Chinese, the Mexicans and the Saudis. They ignore all the good he says about these people and use half-truths to paint the man "racist."

Trump responds to all these: "People say, 'Oh, you don't like China.' No, I love them. But their leaders are much smarter than our leaders, and we can't sustain ourselves with that. There's too much — it's like — it's like take the New England Patriots and Tom Brady and have them play your high school football team. That's the difference between China's leaders and our leaders," Trump said during his announcement speech.

People always come up with all sorts of arguments. They say that Trump has no experience. Alright then, perhaps someone could show us a politician with experience who has made smart foreign policy we all can stand behind? The entire Middle East is in shambles from the experienced politicians from Bush to Obama. Trump says that China's "leaders are much smarter than our leaders." Actually, it's worse than that, even the terrorists on the streets are smarter than American politicians. ISIS was able to carve an Islamic Caliphate State under Obama's watch, who is still calling to oust Bashar Al-Assad as the Bushes called to oust Saddam Hussein, and Obama wants to reinstall Mursi back into office in Egypt.

Talk about the persistence that a candidate must have "experience."

What is required here is not smarts or political experience, but wisdom and prudence.